|
Termyn8or -> RE: Gun Lovers ... Some Facts for those who think you should give them up. (11/29/2008 10:21:35 AM)
|
Thanks CL, I couldn't have said it better myself.
I think that's a common misconception, that a right immunizes or somehow indemnifies someone who victimizes someone while excercising their rights. That was never implied nor inferred.
Some may choose not to own a gun, whether it be due to their lack of faith in their own judgement, like they would shoot someone over a parking space, or even if the have really inquisitive kids and no effective way to safely keep such a weapon. That is their choice. Similarly they can choose not to do drugs, not to protest in the streets or even shout "Fire" in a crowded theater, even if there is one. They can choose to let the police loot their house on a whim, testify against themselves, pay income tax or do anything they wish. But I know my rights and I intend to use them. It is not up to anyone else to make those decisions for me.
The resposibility of gun ownership is not to be taken lightly. For example the only rounds I have right now are copper clad high power (4400FPS) that look like some sort of armor piercing things or something. I would be hard pressed even in an emergency to fire those rounds within city limits, and would be more tempted to use that 1967 Chevy camshaft for defense. These rounds will simply slice through the assailant's body and continue through my house walls to who knows where. I like my neighbors and I don't want to kill them. One day I'll find some lighter loaded hollow points that will tear up the person I shoot more effectively and are much less likely to hurt anyone else.
If we want to go into specific wording, the right to keep and bear arms is pretty clearly defined. I would not be abject to regulations such as within city limits everybody must use hollow points for the reason I just stated. Not that you can't HAVE these high powered rifle rounds, just that you can't FIRE these high power rifle rounds. Actually in no such law should be necessary, but then look around. There are people as dumb as a box of rocks. Many even with guns do not realize the power they wield in their hand.
I am very aprehensive about firing those rounds, even in self defense, because while my life is worth something, it is not worth costing a child in bed across the street their chance at life. Compounding the problem is the fact that I live upstairs, making it even slightly more dangerous in that regard, between gravity/trajectory and all that. These are slicers man. That in fact reduces their effectiveness in stopping an intruder. Just the right kind of drugs in them, they might just keep on coming.
Another slant is that the Constitution was undoubtedly written for law abiding Citizens, and other than Indians or something the intent was that people would not be powerless against a tyrannical government. Many say that it was meant to insure that we could defend ourselves against marauders, theives, land pirates, but that was not the spirit of it in the first place IMO.
The fact is, if the people had solidarity, the government could come for one, and get opened up on from every window on the street. They would not know where it's coming from, now there's a deterrent. That, I believe was the intent. Every other amendment was written specifically to limit the power of the government, why should we believe that the second is any different ?
The fact that when those documents were written there were wild bears running around and all this was not the idea. I think taking the guns away in Austrailia was a crime, there are crocs down there ! What are people to do, just let themselves get eaten ? However that is a different story, because they never had the Constitution quite like ours. Of course that makes it no less foolish.
The government takes guns to protect itself, that mainly because they know they are the one who need to get shot.
T
|
|
|
|
